Encyclopedia of Law and Economics

Living Edition
| Editors: Alain Marciano, Giovanni Battista Ramello

Patent Litigation

  • Elisabetta Ottoz
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7883-6_585-1

Abstract

Patent litigation refers to patent infringement lawsuits or revocation proceedings. Infringement is the act of making, using, selling, or offering to sell a patented invention without the permission of the patent owner. Revocation proceedings refer to the claim on patent validity before civil courts that may be carried out by firms interested not to be sued for infringing “wrongly” granted patents. Presently, national courts of the member states of the European Patent Convention are competent to pass judgment on the infringement and validity of European patents, with inevitable consequences in terms of duplication and inconsistencies. In December 2012, the European Parliament approved the EU unitary patent package, whose ratification by the individual member states will give rise to a European patent with unitary effects in all jurisdictions involved and to the creation of a Unified Patent Court (UPC) with exclusive jurisdiction to hear infringement and invalidity actions. The result will be a patent protection for all participating member states based on a single application and validation.

Keywords

National Court European Patent European Patent Office Patent Holder Patent Infringement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Atkinson S, Marco A, Turner J (2009) The economics of a centralized judiciary: uniformity, forum shopping and the federal circuit. J Law Econ 52:411–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Choi J (1998) Patent litigation as an information-transmission mechanism. Am Econ Rev 88:1249–1263Google Scholar
  3. Cotter T (2011) A research agenda for the comparative law and economics of patent remedies. Minnesota legal studies research paper no. 11-10Google Scholar
  4. Cremers K, ErnickeM, Gaessler F, Harhoff D, Helmers C, McDonagh L, Schliesser P, Van Zeebroeck N (2013) Patent litigation in Europe. ZEW discussion paper 13-072 http://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/83473/1/769014895.pdf
  5. EPO (2013a) Patent litigation in Europe, 3rd edn. European Patent Academy, Munich. http://www.eplit.eu/files/downloads/patent_litigation_in_europe_2013_en.pdf
  6. Frank R, DeFranco D (2000) Patent infringement damages: a brief summary. Fed Cir B J 10:281–291Google Scholar
  7. Graham S, Van Zeebroeck N (2014) Comparing patent litigation across Europe: a first look. Stan Tec L Rev 17:655–708Google Scholar
  8. Harhoff D (2009) Economic cost-benefit analysis of a unified and integrated European patent litigation system. Tender No. MARKT/2008/06/D. http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/indprop/docs/patent/studies/litigation_system_en.pdf
  9. Henry M, Turner J (2006) The court of appeals for the federal circuit’s impact on patent litigation. J Legal Stud 35:85–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lanjouw J, Schankerman M (2001) Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition. RAND J Econ 32:129–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lemley M (2010) Where to file your patent case. AIPLA Q J 38:1–35Google Scholar
  12. Lemley M, Shapiro C (2007) Patent holdup and royalty stacking. Tex Law Rev 85:1991–2049Google Scholar
  13. Llobet G (2003) Patent litigation when innovation is cumulative. Int J Ind Organ 21:1135–1157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Love B (2009) The misuse of reasonable royalty damage as a patent infringement deterrent. Mon Weather Rev 74:909–948Google Scholar
  15. Luginbuehl S (2011) European patent law: towards a uniform interpretation. Edward Elgar, NorthamptonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Priest G, Klein B (1984) The selection of disputes for litigation. J Legal Stud 8:1–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Reitzig M, Henkel J, Heath C (2007) On sharks, trolls, and their patent prey—unrealistic damage awards and firms’ strategies of “being infringed”. Res Policy 36:134–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schankerman M, Scotchmer S (2001) Damages and injunctions in protecting intellectual property. RAND J Econ 32:199–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Spier K, Spulber D (1993) Suit settlement and trial: a theoretical analysis under alternative methods for the allocation of legal costs. J Legal Stud 11:55–81Google Scholar
  20. WIPO (2008) Chapter 2: Fields of intellectual property protection. In: Intellectual property handbook: policy, law and use. http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/about-ip/en/iprm/pdf/ch2.pdf

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti De MartiisUniversity of TurinTurinItaly